The four arguments against America declaring war on Iran.

Some people believe that

1)Iran is trying to aquire nuclear weapons.
2)It would be a very bad thing if this happened; a nuclear weapon in Iranian hands would be significantly more likely to be used than in the hands of the current nuclear powers.
3)The only way to prevent this is by America and/or the West as a whole declaring war on Iran
4)It would therefore be worthwhile to do so.

Some other people, including me, do not believe 4. These can be divided roughly into four categories:

People who do not believe 1. I think these people are probably wrong. It can't be ruled out entirely that Iran isn't trying to develop nuclear weapons, but to believe that you pretty much have to believe that it's deliberately trying to make it look as though it is. A possibility, but not a likely one.

People who do not believe 2. I think these people are fairly clearly wrong - of the current nuclear powers, only China and North Korea are run by regimes even nearly as evil as the Council of Guardians, and both of those are fundamentally pragmatic rather than fanatical. Iran might well use a nuke itself; it might very well supply one to proxies to use.

People who do not believe 3. I don't think these people are right, but I'm not confident about this. I don't *think* sanctions, offers of help with peaceful applications of nuclear power, and diplomacy will stop Iran aquiring a bomb, but I may well be wrong, and I also think it quite possible that it attempts will simply fail to work. But if I had to place money, it would be on the proposition that if there is no war then Iran will be a nuclear power within 15 years, rather than against it.

People who do not believe 4. I'm one of these. Think of the catastrophe the occupation of Iraq has been. Multiply by 2 because Iran is a bigger, more powerful country than Iraq was, by two again because the other Arab nations would be more likely to support a second such country being invaded than a first, by two for a third time because it would be a military already weakened by Iraq doing the invading, and by 15 because the Iranian government has much more public support, and there's much more anti-American-feeling and much less pro-American feeling, than was the case in Iraq - it would be completely unambiguously an occupation rather than a liberation.

*That's* the best argument against war with Iran. Not that bad things may well not happen if war is not declared, but that very bad things indeed are certain to happen if it is.

1. They haven't done any damn thing to us besides Iran is authorized by the NPT to
enrich uranium
2. The rest of the world is totally against it
3. We can't afford another war
4. We don't have the soldiers to fight another war

4 is the weakest premise by far.